Nov 11, 2020 Calorimeter

From GlueXWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Meeting Day: WEDNESDAY
Meeting Time: 11:00 a.m. JLab time

  1. To join via a Web Browser, go to the page [1]
  2. To join via Polycom room system go to the IP Address: ( and enter the meeting ID: 907185247.
  3. To join via phone, use one of the following numbers and the Conference ID: 907185247.
    • US or Canada: +1 408 740 7256 or
    • US or Canada: +1 888 240 2560
  4. Upon connection all microphones are automatically muted. To unmute your mike on a Polycom or equivalent unit, enter *4. Unmuting on a computer is trivial as there is a microphone button than can be clicked.
  5. More information on connecting to bluejeans is available.

Participant Direct Lines

  • JLab Phone in CC L207 is 757-269-7084 (usual room)
  • JLab Phone: in CC F326 is 757-269-6460
  • Phone in the Regina Video-conference Suite is 306-585-4204
  • Athens Phone: in Christina's office is 011-30-210-727-6947


  1. FCAL HDFCAL log book
  2. BCAL HDBCAL log book
  3. Calibrations: 2020 Data Production; RunPeriod-2019-11 Validation; Offline Monitoring Data Validation

Goals for Calorimetry Group

  1. Determine preliminary photon reconstruction efficiencies as a function of E, phi and theta in data and simulation with a point-to-point precision of at least 5%.
  2. Measure systematics of pi0/eta mass calibration as a function of detector position to a precision of at least 5 MeV.
  3. Demonstrate agreement of photon reconstruction efficiency and resolution between data and simulation as a function of E, phi and theta to within 5%.

Action Items

  1. Short term CALWG Items
  2. Long term items
  3. Calorimeter work packages

Tentative Agenda

  1. Announcements
  2. Run Preparations
    1. FCAL
    2. BCAL
  3. PrimEx/CCAL/FCAL-II
  4. Calibration
  5. Monitoring
    1. BCAL LED
    2. BCAL (offline)
    3. FCAL (offline) method for bad channels map GlueX data
  6. Efficiency
  7. Reconstruction
    1. Single block showers for muons (Elton)
  8. Simulations
  9. Action Items
  10. Any other business


Attending: Varun, Karthik, Igal, Zisis, Colin, Elton, Christina, Mark, Sasha, Sean, Matt, Rebecca, Jon, Chandra, Malte, Tolga, Susan

  1. Announcements
    • This is the first joint CALWG/PrimEx calorimeter meeting. We will have these once a month.
  2. Run Preparations
    1. FCAL: Mark reported that 80 bases have been removed. Using a 60Co source from RadCon (strongest one that can be loaned to the Hall) trying to fry the microcontroller; so far no failure. Ben Raydo has a watchdog timer on the microcontroller but needs to crash the base to test it. Need to check the CAN interface communication on base: this is a good diagnostic to look at. Colin mentioned that it could be a firmware issue. Jon added that each base can be tested one at a time, which takes 80-100 hours. It is likely not an RF issue in the hall; we have no evidence that this a good candidate. Matt reminded us that we are using flat ribbon cables; when we have beam we can test beam on/off and carry out a Fourier transform. Mark said that radiation damage is a long short, and anyhow that cannot be tested using a 60 Co source. Sasha mentioned that power cycling recovers from the issue; perhaps bit errors are responsible. More discussion will occur offline and at Friday's PrimEx meeting.
    2. BCAL: nothing to report.
  3. PrimEx/CCAL/FCAL-II: see item below.
  4. Calibration: Matt brought up the discussion about having a common calibration strategy between PrimEx and GlueX. Igal's method can be used (PrimEx has a tighter tolerance than GlueX) and IU can help. Igal mentioned that his scripts are pretty automatic and can be tweaked if needed. His approach is a daily calibration with our energy-deposition correction, and then that correction is applied at the end on a per-ring basis. Sean mentioned that we need to settle on how often we do it and agree on the procedure, and on when to start applying it (past data or future data only?). Igal said that the scheme can be checked against those few runs where the CCAL was behind the FCAL. Other considerations: TOF veto no track, subtract random background. Igal said that it takes 2-4 weeks to check the cross section. Matt added that the Ebeam-Ecompton is an important variable. It was agreed that by the next joint meeting (Dec 9) both Igal and Colin will give updates on their respective analyses.
  5. Monitoring
    1. BCAL LED: Varun reported that this work and the radiation damage study will continue early in the new year so that he can work on his beam asymmetry analysis until then.
    2. BCAL (offline): nothing to report by Tolga; Sean mentioned that there is no monitoring work been done now.
    3. FCAL (offline) Susan went over the bad channel map (link to Wiki page in her presentation). She looked at the last run in the period. Mark sent info to Susan on HV failures. Situation changes from run to run. Susan looked first at sub-runs of this one run illustrating that the cycling procedure causes sub-runs without LED information. It was agreed to use per-run efficiencies between 0 and 1 for each channel; efficiencies larger than 1 will be set to 1. Sasha suggested that the occupancy plots (raw data) be checked too, correlated to the physics trigger.
  6. Efficiency: Elton will reconvene the reconstruction task force to continue the discussion on efficiencies. Tolga will contribute in the next two weeks; this will include a t-bin study and a polar angle look.
  7. Reconstruction: Andrew (CPP) is looking at Bethe-Heitler events. Energy: no FCAL-BCAL. Looking at single blocks ion the FCAL but nothing is written to REST. Code needs two blocks to form a shower. CPP needs FCAL match to single-particle tracks. Elton said that Drew is looking at DFCALhit object. Mark said that Drew should look at the FCAL shower factory and then the neutral shower object, where the no. of blocks is a parameter. Sean suggested to write out cluster objects in REST and then apply calibrations later (easier). Proton in the BCAL leaves a tiny amount of energy.
    1. Single block showers for muons (Elton)
  8. Simulations: nothing to report.
  9. Action Items:
    • No specific updates to the Short-, Long-Term or Work packages. Elton requested that we add a detailed study of the fiducial volume around the beam hole. Rebecca is looking at the efficiency at small angles. Check 2017 data first; tine MC to get better agreement with data for 2018.
  10. Any other business: none.